Newspaper sales figures in Scotland now come out in a patchy and unco-ordinated sort of way, with different frequencies and at different times of year, so we thought it’d be worth collecting them together for easy reference.

The numbers below are the most recent figures for each title that we know of – for papers classed as “national” that means November last year, and for those counted as “regional” (which includes the Scotsman and Herald titles) it’s this month.

Figures have all been rounded to the nearest 100, and increase/decrease stats refer in all cases to the corresponding sales for one year previously.

If we were to generously assume that absolutely nobody buys two papers in one day and that every sale therefore represents a separate person – which isn’t the case – it would mean that just over 803,000 Scots bought some kind of newspaper every day, representing 18% of the adult population of 4.44m.

Or put another way, at least 82% of adult Scots DON’T buy any newspapers.

Then again, given that around half of the population until fairly recently didn’t have one to buy that reflected its political outlook (and still only has a solitary title), we suppose in some respects that might be considered an impressive performance.

264 to “The sands of the times”

To be fair, it looks like a terminal decline of printed media caused by new online media, given almost all papers across the political spectrum are falling, including very disappointingly the Sunday Herald.

It’s also disappointing that the National barely makes 5 figures, it had such great promise when it was launched.

A wodge of the garbage will be bought by council libraries, uni’s and colleges. Good see neo fascist Voice of the North P&J on the skids. I finally got my work to stop buying that awful rubbish in particular.

It will be very interesting to see The Nationals figures when they next come out. Hopefully they will have increased or at least stayed level and that should be a clarion call to all the others with falling circulation to get their act together. However we all know that the others will just merrily go about their business as they have been doing for years. RIP print media.

“How does this compare to the daily statistics of Wings for hits from Scotland / rUK?”

You can’t really compare on the available data, because it’s apples and oranges. We typically get 100,000 to 150,000 pageviews a day, but we don’t have figures for daily unique readers, which would be a fairer comparison.

Unfortunately not buying them doesn’t stop their loaded headlines being shouted out every morning on GMS. Nor their “journos” being invited on daily to give their loaded opinions via the ever helpful, ever compliant BBC.

That is something that should stop. Absolutely with GAPonsonby on that one.

So when ‘journalists’ and their mates liken the SNP to a cult, they previously thought that people were following the SNP despite the, ehm, ‘facts’ they were printing about how corrupt/hypocritical/bad they were, but now they will realise it’s actually partly because hardly anyone reads their papers. Sure, a few more people may visit their websites, but those people are more likely to also access other online information of a slightly less partisan uniformity.

In any case, if you buy a tabloid, you’re probably reading the sports pages or the gossip stuff – that’s what I do if I find one discarded on public transport.

Part of the phenomenon, is down to the movement away from the printed word to online media.

However the rate of decline is too fast to be that alone. The Record don’t want to reflect the feelings of their readership. The London editorial agenda leads the news not the news itself. The agenda is to bash the SNP and by default nearly 50% of Scotland, who will vote yes in another referendum.

It’s almost like they don’t care if they all gradually disappear. Perhaps the billionaires who own these rags don’t care about the job losses and individuals employed. They just keep pushing the same anti SNP message and people walk away.

As your grannie would say:”Hell mend them and hell mend the duplicitous staff like Torquial and Clegg”.

82% of the Scottish adult population are sending a message! If we want NEWS we clearly don’t trust the newspapers to provide it. Why would a sane person buy a newspaper that does not reflect their views or worse is clearly opposed to their views? It’s the same reason people get so pissed off with the BBC ramming anti Scottish crap down their throats. If the BBC want to take sides, fine, but don’t expect people to willingly pay for it.
I had a guy at my door two days ago asking if I’d like to have the EE or P&J delivered. I told him to come back when they started printing the truth. He didn’t even look surprised. He just gave me a defeated look.
SNP x 2.

“803,000 Scots bought some kind of newspaper every day”
This doesn’t take into account Circulation v Readership. Readership varies between newspapers with some papers achieving as much as 4 times readership compared to circulation. This is where the print overtakes online media.

“Euroscepticism in Scotland is at a record high, according to research that challenges claims that the country is significantly more pro-European than the rest of the UK.”

via

“In an apparent contradiction of SNP claims that the forthcoming referendum could take Scotland out of the EU against its will, the study also found that 60% of Scots can be classed as Eurosceptic, with only one-fifth happy to “leave things as they are”.”

to

“Prof John Curtice, of the University of Strathclyde, who authored the report, said the mood in favour of a looser relationship with Brussels was pervasive across the UK. He said: “This kind of scepticism is even quite common in Scotland, where both previous survey research and more recent opinion polls have suggested that those living north of the border hold a rather more favourable view of the EU.”

Who else but. “Of Strathclyde uni” quite sneaky creepy UKOK too. Prof Curtice is rather more than of Strathclyde uni and does he speak for the uni etc?

I think UKOK propaganda like Rancid’s here suggests Scotland must vote Out of the EU, I could be mistaken and its all for our own UKOK good, as ever:D

@Giesabrek – If The National had any promise at all on its launch it was from its publishers and editor, not in reality.
This was a paper wrung from Newsquest by the SNP as an alternative to even more swinging editorial cuts at their other titles. Despite an impressive array of writers (and, of course, young Moodie), it remains what it always was – a sop to nationalist sentiment.
Until such times as the owners treat it like a proper newspaper with reasonable deadlines, full sports coverage, a dedicated commercial arm and more than just a handful of ludicrously overworked staffers, it will never be able to compete *as a newspaper* with other titles. Having said all of that, I think that, in the circs, Callum Baird and his team do a terrific job.

Just as amusing as the collapse in sales figures is the wounded outrage of the useless serfs who toil in the salt mines of the colonial MSM. ‘We’re proper journalists!’ they cry, as if there is some craft, some esoteric art, involved in the regurgitation of the propaganda they relay to us on behalf of governments and corporations. ‘We’re specialists and you need us!’ they whine.

I picture the likes of Tom Gordon and David Clegg as the colony leader in that episode of the Twilight Zone, the man who thought he was indispensable to those he thought he led, left stranded on a hostile planet as his people are evacuated, forlornly shouting into a wilderness ‘come back!’ as his voice recedes to nothingness..

With each day that goes by I become more and more convinced that the Scottish Blats are being supported by some sort of WM slush fund – either that or their owners have some sort of death wish.

Furthermore, given the shoestring staffing levels they have all been reduced to one must question how they manage to dig up all the SNPBad stories and SNP MP smears which seemm to appear in a wonderfully co-ordinated manner. Is all the searching for this negative stuff being done by some sinister WM organisation and then fed to the MSM?

It is interesting to see that the P&J sells more than the combined sales of The Scotsman and Herald with the Courier not far behind.

I can’t see The Scotsman, SoS and EEN surviving for much longer.

It’s a bit depressing to see the figures for The National and Sunday Herald.

If Trinity M’s nice shiny new allegedly neutral blat contains football coverage at the same level as The Record it will be interesting to see waht happens to The Record’ circulation.

‘Until such times as the owners treat it like a proper newspaper with reasonable deadlines, full sports coverage, a dedicated commercial arm and more than just a handful of ludicrously overworked staffers, it will never be able to compete *as a newspaper* with other titles’

The National mostly pussyfoots around and comes across as a free handout student magazine at a Scottish Greens convention. Replace the Daily Record in Scotland, or rather give the readers that have rejected it`s unionist pro-Labour stance a paper they can return to, and sales might improve.
Maybe.

If trees could feel and think and articulate their feelings and thoughts: Happy days over not being chopped down en masse for drivel fodder.

Additionally, for the once highest per capita per population consumer globally of chopped down trees stripped and industrially prepped as drivel fodder as news, good news again for the trees as well as the Jock portion of humanity who are seeking to be informed via multiple other alternative researched sources rather than the piss-poor pish which has masqueraded as factual fantasies in printed form in the Yookay and globally for a donkey of years plus donkies of others: The Jocks ahead of the enlightenment curve again.

Trust the broadcast versions of the print, establishment Jackanories are following the same trajectory towards being boycotted unto extinction.

Very much looking forward to seeing Jakey La Burd in the Broo queue along with Glennie Robbo with Buchanan re-appearing to sustain them with a diet of Cochers type hot air in mega dollops a la le Hieronymous Bosch painted nightmares.

Cracking prospect as we wipe the soles of our shoes upon re-entering our restored popular sovereign state.

There will be many who prefer to buy their news through an on-line subscription which is also a factor to be considered in the mix.

The man or woman with a newspaper tucked under their arm is becoming a rare sight and in my last employment it was not often that folk read a paper at the lunch break.
I buy ‘The National’ every day and have a 1 year on-line subscription too but stopped buying the Sunday Herald.

Mobile phones and tablets along with many free WIFI spots round and about urban areas and many public buildings have allowed people to access the new media.

For folk with an interest in politics or general news can find on-line blogs which allow a wide range of user involvement, some without unreasonable censorship being imposed, and are fast becoming the way to go.

Who goes to a hire a DVD now. Who still has a VHS player not many I’m sure. Technology moves on not all good but not all bad.

PS:
Meanwhile in the chamber Kezia still trying to sell her 1p tax rise in Scotland and the naughty SNP members are being hostile, twice warned by the the presiding officer, and asking too many awkward questions about it.

Something that I have noticed is the prevalence of Unionists to post links on Facebook to anti Scotland/SNP/Yes stories featuring in the Scotsman/Record/Daily Mail etc.

So although people may not be physically buying a newspaper, these rags are still viewed as Unionist bibles by some who have embraced new/social media. This method serves as an online “word of mouth/whispering campaign” to do down Scotland.

Take an example of someone I know;

Ex military, Rangers fan, Unionist and user of Facebook, who will regularly post anti Yes links featured on the Scotsman. He isn’t buying the rag, but he’s still referencing it’s content. The online Scotsman and other anti Scottish publications are grasped by Unionists like a child grasps a comfort blanket.

I’m also quite sure that Editors and Owners of anti Scottish media will be offered gongs in Honours lists etc to ensure that they continue to publish anti Scottish propaganda. It’s how the British Establishment keeps the movers and shakers onside.

Many people have told me that they were disappointed with the National. They wanted a Centre Left Newspaper supporting Independence and SNP, but that was NOT what they got.

Complaints were:

Way too much space and prominence given to the radical left in one guise or another, and people like Sillars, Galloway etc. Yet more carping about what the SNP Government is not doing right (without any balancing information let alone praise) was not what was wanted.

Prominence given to criticism of SNP Government by Labour/Tory/Lib-Dem MSPs with the statement from the Government (given in a very neutral way) relegated to the last 2 or 3 paragraphs. Much the same tactics as the MSM – not good enough.

Repetition of negative stories from the MSM with the distortions and lies unquestioned. The most egregious examples were the stories about Police Scotland. That seems to have stopped, but I think it was done too late. Many no longer buy the National.

I don’t think folks wanted blind praise for SNP but they wanted something a bit more supportive of SNP than the lukewarm, half-hearted articles they got.

Apart from the decline from online news sources there is the fact that newspapers in general have alienated their readers against them.

Having the arrogance to think that they alone should know who should govern the Scottish People, it’s as though they had the devine right of kings, totally delusional.

Colluding with Westminster elite to cover up extremely serious damming stories regarding murders, pedophiles, how long did they know about Jimmy Savile, not just the BBC, major banking crime. By association they are as guilty as the perpetrators.

Journalists getting away phone hacking, bribing police and public officials, very few jailed, come to that editors, owners.

Totally biased political reporting with no thought to honesty and decency. Up to the neck fraudulently swindling the People of Scotland out of their Independence.

Publishing blatant lies with tiny retractions but mostly no retractions whatsoever, brass neck does not even start to cover it.

In addition publishing news that is 3 or more days old, old news is no news at all.

Reporting Scotland and all it’s People in a manner becoming that of an enemy state hell bent on the destruction of The Scots.

The newspaper media have hastened their own demise by all of the above, they are now viewed as lying scum by a great many Scots. Still it is a great pity that they have done this to themselves, they have had their day and besides advertisers are also flocking to the web in droves, fait accompli.

How are newspaper returns classified
Nightly every supermarket bundles up literally hundreds of papers
Not just because I’m biased but most of what’s sent back are Daily Records, sometimes in a couple of piles a foot thick from Asda and the other big stores, particularly Morrisons coz they’re really anti Scottish

It’s one of life’s little joys when I see the (usually not male staff) tying them up I always stand and gloat (Is it very wrong)…Gleeful happiness

The average factor of readership to circulation is 2.5 to 3, making for readership of between 2 and 2.4 million. Put this in the context of age demographics, which shows a majority of sales to the above-35s, and even if we reduce that readership factor to allow for a higher proportion of 2 or less people in one household, it means that the older demographic group who read the newspapers will be around the 1.5 million mark as a rule of thumb.

Therefore, the age groups most likely to vote in elections or a referendum are the ones most subject (probably willingly) to the drivel poured out by the MSM in print.

Whether that changes due to the shift to online publication is another matter. By what I’ve seen so far, the stances and journalistic quality online is no better than the print editions. This is probably due to the fact that as far as online advertising revenue is concerned, traffic is traffic, regardless of whether one is engaging with an article to agree with or contest it. Whereas, if one buys a newspaper, it’s largely due to it printing what you want to read.

Complicated times. Which is why I’m extremely glad that websites such as WoS exist.

Scot Goes Pop has a post about those journalists asserting that Scottish opinion is just as biased against Europe as the rest of the UK.

” Luckily for all of us, the evidence on this subject is publicly available, and to state the bleedin’ obvious, “most” of it does not suggest that Scotland is in line with English public opinion. In fact, absolutely all of it suggests the complete opposite.”

Soon the only people buying newspapers will be those who mouth the words as they read. They will be written by those who mouth the words as they write, although I suspect some of the journalists do that now.

James Kelly in the chamber tries again to impress for ‘Scottish’ labour…not off to a good start though, but basically it’s all Swinney’s fault forcing poor councils to reduce services. (No mention of WM cuts being the prime driver and the SNP must have money stashed down the back of the settee)

He’s not good at thinking on his feet or counting either when asked a challenging question. Somebody must have voted for him though. 🙁

” Luckily for all of us, the evidence on this subject is publicly available, and to state the bleedin’ obvious, “most” of it does not suggest that Scotland is in line with English public opinion. In fact, absolutely all of it suggests the complete opposite.”

That cant be right! Libby Carrell, of rancid The Graun, says only today that Scotland is voting OUT, so why aren’t you? And she must be honest because she’s got a Professor, of Strathclyde uni, who says his new exciting and authoritative study for NatCen Social Research report “uncovers” Scotland is voting OUT, so it must be true.

Professor Curtice, of Strathclyde uni, spends an awful lot of time making authoritative study for NatCen Social Research uncovers reports that say stuff to make SNP Scots.gov look bad but its probably just a hobby of his, like his collecting mountains of UKOK cash from hard core yoon attack propaganda merchants hobby.

Either that or he does fcuk all actual work what he’s paid to do, of Strathclyde university.

Many of these rags should have folded ages ago. Like some other posters, I am convinced that they are being propped up by dark powers, intend on manipulating the masses and maintaining the UKOK narrative. Pure propaganda.

The bad news is that much more than 18% of scots notice the SNP BAD headlines every day. “If the sweaties don’t buy anymore, then we will still fill their minds with SNP BAD headlines.”

The good news is that more and more people are simply ignoring the headlines. Corporate media manipulation lost a critical amount of ground, thanks to social media and word of mouth. The referendum opened up 1.6 million pairs of eyes to the mind manipulation tricks and sinister agenda of the UKOK media. They over-egged the pudding, their soft underbelly (social media) was exposed and now its a case of diminishing returns. There will come a point when the dark powers will realise that their power of manipulation is all but gone and when they do, many newspaper plugs will be pulled.

Having not purchased a newspaper for some time I found it awkward buying the National and Sunday Herald. I just got out of the habit of buying papers. When finished reading the paper I leave it on top of the free Metro’s that can be had on Dundee’s buses.

@ heedtracker
Can’t bring myself to actually read the P&J which is why I never know who’s died.
But its Wikipedia article is illustrated by the iconic edition glorifying the UTG plans:“Gardens Plan ‘will create 6,500 city jobs'”.

I dont waste time on rancid’s display of UKOK bigots, crackpots and riderooo.

Will same UKOK liberal media tell its Scotland reader why Westminster is cutting 6 seats out of Scotland for next UKOK GE, down to 53 to 59? Probably not. Then there’s 200+ new Lords a troughing being a made up by Cammers.

If you cant beat them, UKOK scrap them. What a difference a NO vote makes.

Capella says:
24 February, 2016 at 4:46 pm
@ heedtracker
Can’t bring myself to actually read the P&J which is why I never know who’s died

Well they did fart a young go getter like Mike Gove into the Westminster universe pantheon of toryboy UK. So maybe there is karma around. In that Mike Gove could be the next UKOK PM, which has nothing at all to do with his current EU out stuff, like with Bojo.

Actually oor Mike was one of the most militant trade unionists that went on strike against whoever it is that owned or owns the P&J. He was out for a year, famous for his, you wont get me I’m part of the union singing round the big barrel fire, thumping his banner over the windscreen of the bosses limo at the works gates etc.

And yet here’s Mike, as far right as it gets before he decides to legalise slavery, build casinos on the Moon, re-invade France and take back Calais etc

The threads of UKOK far right history. There’s quite a lot of far left tory convert nutters in UKOK politics and wannabes too, all the way from Slovenia…

Too many ‘news’papers in Scotland don’t report news–they make the news, they spin a story, virtually ANY story, to their own political agenda, vis-a-vis children’s book author, JK Rowling, a woman who uses her immense wealth to intimidate and bully people with an island of lawyers, is regarded by this Colonial Media as some kind of saint. Whereas SNP MP Dr Philippa Whitford, a surgeon who saves lives and covers for other staff during summer & Christmas holidays (and saving the hospital money), is portrayed by this Colonial Media in the most despicable terms.

THAT is why readers in Scotland don’t buy their trash because WE KNOW the truth and we know their agenda. They are nothing but Yoonyoonist propaganda sheets and only the really thick would part with cash to buy their drivel. Waken up to the Colonial Media.

Unfortunately the knuckle dragging mouthbreeding brain dead part of the population (not that I advocate name calling) will keep buying some of these Shystenmongers Scribblings
so we’ll have to put up with their gruntings a tad longer until the rest of the liquid parts of their scrotum like jellied brains leak away from under use as all things do that eventually become extinct or deny Darwins theory of evolution and just stop “evoluting” and forget to breathe

Its an industry on its last legs but it will never die they need it to spread the seeds of their anti anything “Bitish” rule Britannia agenda.

The good thing is it would seem a fair percentage have either cottoned on to it or just cant be bothered paying good money to read a poor excuse for journalism filled with xenophobic small minded paranoid hacks opinions.

That aint news you muppets this above is news and here is how it goes..

Newsflash figures released for newspapers today give a dire warning to their future people are not buying them.

We go on location to a shitty street in Scotland to talk to wee Tam ,well Tam why do you not buy a newspaper,wee Tam they are shite man and lidls bog roll is cheaper.

And there we have it from an expert in the field.

And over to the studio where we have a load of labour numpties going to talk pish for 20 mins.

Those figures can’t possibly be correct, when I recently tweeted to Leasky about falling sales, he told me I didn’t know what I was talking about, sales/readership at the Herald were up. Maybe if their journos didn’t spend time on twitter abusing people and blocking them for no reason other than being pro Scotland then sales wouldn’t be so bad.

I there a ‘WEE blEU BOOK’ in the offing? Might be useful to put forward the EU Ref arguments and a chance to make comparisons with the Scottish Ref. It would be a sneaky means to get real facts out to people about the ScotRef under the guise of the EU Ref. Might open some eyes.

I travel through Edinburgh airport every fortnight and there’s always a pile of free daily mails, Scotsman & times newspapers at gate 11 just before you board the aircraft.
Must be giving a few thousand free newspapers if that is repeated on most of the flights.

Its hard to tell if these countries have a newspaper as far right as the Daily Heil. But someone’s got to make money off of UK tory voting perverts that like to look at little girls in their underpants.

Wiki does a Political alignment by Publisher rank thing for Germany, with Germany’s biggest seller Die Zeit at 503,814, weekly and its centrist liberal, center-left left-liberal, critical-liberal, etc publisher.

Who have we got? rancid The Graun’s a ferocious toryboy hard core conservative joke now.

No wonder toryboy world has such a straggle hold on the BBC and all the tory rule Brit-England-tania stuff it belchs out across their UKOK lands.

The sad truth is, I only ever buy the National because I feel I should, not because I particularly want to. It employs a lot of painfully dull writers, is embarrassingly pro-SNP and some of those old photoshopped covers were excruciating.

There are quite a few myths flying around Wings today, Rev Stu. For example the idea that the daily paper ordered for delivery is read by the whole family. It may go out with Dad or Mum in the morning and not make it back home in the evening with Mum or Dad.

Then couple that with the myth that the computer based news is only read by one family member is wrong too. Either they all have access to news an their own online news provider or the home computer gets used by the whole family.

Readership figures are not, by any means, an exact science.
Even the radio figures can be quite misleading as I know homes where the radio gets switched on in the morning and provides a background noise all day.

The drops in circulation cited are in line with UK drops. An article in the Guardian from October 2015 reckoned the average UK daily drop at 8%- 9% per annum. The figures quoted in this piece are in line with that.

Interestingly the Labour supporting Daily Mirror does seem to be an outlier, its UK drop is about 9%, but it seems somewhat more drastic in Scotland.

A lot of people who are still buying newspapers often have vouchers which reduce the cost. If the papers were not offering this sort of discount then their circulation figures might be even worse.

I subscribe to the digital Herald so big annual saving. I thing the contribution to the Herald’s finances from their digital subscriptions and on-line subscriptions is now significant in terms of their overall income but they have not given any info on it recently.

Incredibly stupid of them, the SH did have the Indy support but is now like, eh? PH was obsessed with Sheridan to the extent of ignoring the Hope over Fear, and I think that set the downward trend for it, which has hacked off a lot of regular posters and readers.

Herald not only got quite ridiculous on its anti-SNP line it was anti-Corbyn, lost interest in Labour and seems to have turned to the Conservatives. In fact it’s not just SNP and Indy supporters in the forum who think it’s bad, it’s Labour ones too. There’s hope for all of us, as it makes that common bond – recognition of duff reporting and bias. Hug a Labour voter!

In addition to that its moderation is weird, not just Indy supporters who suffer, I can testify to anti-SNP / anti-Indy postings being removed too, even though following the Herlad’s posting rules. Add to that an influx of Scotsman posters, and the forum is all but destroyed.

It’s a shame. If the Herald had moved the other way, to being balanced and as neutral as it could get, improve its reporting standards, it’s business section is mostly good and it could have even increased circulation I think. Indy Scotland will need a good business paper, like the pink Times but Scottish business. Ah well.

There’s still good Indy posters there, including a good new Green poster, and I think it’s time I left it to it, now Smith and the fiscal framework is over. No idea if I did any good or not, or was it worth it, but time for new blood, I’m getting stale.

It used to put up new articles at 3.20 on the dot, nowadays they go up after midnight. If you don’t get the first sensible posting in, one of the trolls is likely to get in and get dozens of replies, wasting any effect. In the heat of the Ref you could get as many as 250 upvotes, before people had to sign in to up (or down before). Now it’s a rare posting will get 50, which I think shows its online decline as well as the printed copy.

If either the daily or the Sunday Herald want to halt the decline, they need to have a long hard look in the mirror at themselves, and try some journalism for a change. Tom Gordon tries, Michael Settle is a curious one, Iain McW is variable, apart from that?

I gave up on the Sunday Herald a few weeks ago. The Graham Speirs fiasco and the sacking of Angela Haggarty finished it for me.Although I see Miss Haggarty is to be given her column back, too late for me.

I did not like her column too much anyway, but the manner of her sacking was quiet disgraceful. I was kinda swithering over SH for a wee while, but when Ian Bell died that was that. Nothing much worthwhile to read and Iain McWhirter seems to blow hot and cold.

On circulation numbers, for the past 3 months when I still bought the SH I was always offered a free Sun. I would never give that rag house room and made my feelings pretty clear, but the wee lassie on the till had to ring it through as a sale, then deduct the money from my total. So a sneaky way to pochle the figures methinks.

I understand the limits to the incremental movement towards Scottish self determination that was achieved today. Something warm however fills my heart (knowing and seeing it play out in front of my eyes), that there is at least a Scottish Government actively ‘negotiating’ (that is to say; “actively opposing”) the Londoncentric Westminster establishment.

On the opposite side of the coin, watching members of the Unionist party’s (Liberal, Labour, Tory) worrying and arguing that a ‘wee, poor country’ (Their words, not mine) of Scotland can somehow create so much detriment to the rest of the UK on any final negotiated position, that anyone in the rUK would ever notice, is the most telling outcome of all this for me.

Just been for shopping. At the news stand I passed two elderly folk shaking with fear and anger about SNPBad in the press. As they left I tried to reassure them it was made up but the mere act of saying that seemed to make me SNPBad and they fled.

These clearly weren’t people who could conceive of voting anything other than Tory. No need for papers to persuade them yet they appear to be being whipped to near hysteria by SNPBad.

The Yoons in trying to frighten and break the SNP vote must be putting their own voters in Cardiac wards. At least they won’t be Tory run wards but can’t see how that will help them in the long run.

Interestingly though they looked at all the Tory papers, they didn’t buy one. Maybe they couldn’t afford to. I just do not get these people or what reality must be for them.

Thinking maybe it could be the Sunday Post doing the original “Oor-Wullie / The Broons” pages that brought most of their readership in.. (remember the alternating festive annuals yer granny used to get ye too, aye.)

The same way people buy certain newspapers because they like their crossword puzzle(s)?

O/T In other media – BBC Caesar!, which has had 100% of it’s Westminster budget cut – produces some good programmes (with subtitles).
Caesar! air Falach
“Little known and unusual stories from Scotland’s history.”

Episode 6 tells the story of Knoydart and the evil consequences of the union and Labour Party betrayal. Features nazi loving Tory landowner, Lord Brocket.
One reason for Osborne to cut the funding.

Does anyone fancy starting a campaign to push up the National’s figures? I have an online subscription and by the daily sometimes. I think it’s a good paper. If we encouraged all our Yes voting friends we could bump up the figures and the influence. Any thoughts?

O/t If there is a Scottish news at six, will anyone watch it? So many Scots are out of the habit of watching television. The yoons have destroyed the one they love. It’s probably too late to save the bbc. Stv will die as well as advertisers see it’s falling viewer figures. Thanks again no voters!

Yes, I remember the annuals in alternating yeas. When my son was old enough I was looking forward to getting them for his Christmas but by then, 1980s, they were bringing them out together.

Agree about the crosswords – even the Metro has gone back to including them in the paper. If anyone develops an app that allows you to complete the crossword on your tablet etc. the papers will be stuffed.

I think I pointed out that I challenged my local mini supermarket when they reduced the National being stocjed to 4 a day, so they actually started stocking more, which is good I can get my National again. That’s when I can find it, very often having to search under the right wing rags where it’s placed back to front, upside down!

They said that ‘sales automatically generate numbers stocked’. However, that does not seem the case with the unionist papers, which some, most days have piles of them left towards the end of the day. For instance the Scotsman and the Telegraph.

O/T
One thing, on facebook, seeing a few dodgy pretendy SNP supporting pages where the usual is,
‘I am a member of the SNP but having second thoughts’, and now, ‘what does anyone think, maybe we should be voting out of EU, even if england votes to stay’.

I can spot the faux SNP/independence support pages a mile off, but many can’t! They start by being all nice and caring, then worried and then purely sceptical and negative.

Back in the late 80s early 90s the Record had a circulation equal to the entire sale of all newspapers in Scotland in 2016. It is simply not a medium people use much.

Freebies like the Metro have made newspapers low value, low quality things. I recall people getting het up in the office back in the 80s over articles in the Mail or the Sun or whatever, now it is very rare to see someone with a paper in the office much less sound off about something in one. People read the web or do stuff on their mobiles at lunch time these days.

The lies and the propaganda in the press may annoy us but I think the reason it has so little impact on voting behaviour is that no one reads it.

Of course we should. The National has improved continually and is a marvel being run on a shoestring. I’ve no idea what some posters here want. It apparently is too SNP but not SNP enough at the same time. I doesn’t have tits and bums certainly and mind numbing coverage of Strictly Come X Factor. It has however daily contributions from a range of significant figures in support of independence for the mouth watering price of a fecking Mars bar. And its new regular history features and four pages of readers letters are first class.

If we doubled its circulation its potential is limitless

We were handed a tool and a weapon to promote independence but some people don’t appear to understand what it could do for us.

I’m not about to start trawling back through all the comments again, Awizgonny, but for starters the Rev Stu said in the article itself, “and that every sale therefore represents a separate person – which isn’t the case,”

It doesn’t take an Einstein to work out a paper delivered to a household may be read by more than one person. It is, though, easy to look at stats and assume each purchase to be one reader.

Yes Stephen , and I read the following today ( however I also remembered reading in December 2015 about IPSA investigating two MP’s whose names were not disclosed by IPSA ) :

FIRST MR BOSWELL TODAY :

A formal investigation has been launched into SNP MP Phil Boswell’s use of expenses.

The Independent Parliamentary Standards Association (Ipsa) announced that the compliance officer has opened an investigation into his claims.

Ipsa said the investigation was triggered following a complaint by a member of the public.

Compliance officer Peter Davis has faced criticism for settling almost all of his cases without any publicity – despite promising to disclose the outcome of all investigations.

The official notice of the investigation said: “The compliance officer for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority has opened an investigation to determine whether Mr Phil Boswell MP has been paid an amount under the MPs’ Scheme of Business Costs and Expenses (‘the Scheme’) that should not have been allowed.”

The investigation will be conducted into claims submitted under the heading of “office costs expenditure”.

The official notice made clear that no further information would be published until the investigation had concluded.

In January a separate investigation was launched into Mr Boswell’s business interests by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards.

That probe relates to allegations he contravened parliamentary rules by failing to register his financial interests.

SO LET’S NOW GO BACK TO DECEMBER 2015 STEPHEN :

Ipsa, the expenses watchdog, refuses to name two MPs despite referring them to police amid concerns that ‘criminal offences’ may have been committed

The expenses watchdog has been accused of a “cover up” after refusing to name two MPs who were re-elected in May while they were subject to secret police investigations.

Ipsa revealed yesterday that it referred the MPs to Scotland Yard in March over their expenses after being given “reason to suspect a criminal offence may have been committed”.

However it “buried” the disclosure on page 74 of its annual report and refused to name the two MPs amid concerns that doing so would be “unfair”.

The accounts also revealed that the expenses watchdog named just one MP out of the 40 cases it investigated last year.

Sir Alistair Graham,the former chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, said: “Clearly the electorate have a right to know about their member of parliament, especially during an election when there should be total transparency about their track record.

“It was a serious misjudgment by Ipsa not to make public the fact that they had referred the matter to the police.

“You can understand these MPs may feel it would put them at a disadvantage, but presumably at that point Ipsa must have had sufficient evidence to them to think there was a prima face case for an investigation.

“It could give the perception of a cover up prior to a general election. It is bizarre that they are burying in their annual report a very serious piece of information. It has the feel of a cover up.”

FUNNY , IS IT NOT STEPHEN THAT SNP MP’S NAMES ALWAYS GET LEAKED AND THAT IPSA FAIL TO ACCORD THEM THE ‘FAIR’ TREATMENT THEY USUALLY FEEL IS APPROPRIATE I.E. IN RETAINING AN MP’S ANONYMITY WHILE BEING INVESTIGATED. AS FAR AS I AM AWARE THESE TWO MP’S THEY HAVE NOT YET BEEN NAMED , BUT GOING BY USUAL TREATMENT OF SNP MP’S I THINK HIGHLY UNLIKELY THEY ARE FROM THE SNP .

How is the National’s on line digital subscription counted? It costs almost as much and is identical to the dead tree version (apart from the ‘missing’ crossword clues.) We used to get both paper and digital but as the newsagent sometimes had sold out or only had a couple left, I decided to stop getting it in order for potential new readers to see it and buy one.

Ironic if a lot of digital readers are doing the same resulting in lower counted sales.

BTW if you are digital and are annoyed that there are no crossword clues, here is the work around I use.

Download the crossword page and view the pdf. Note the clues are visible. Zoom up to a suitable size on the crossword. Use ‘Snipping tool’ to cut a copy then use its pen tool to fill it in. Easy peasy.

I used to work for a Company that sold newspapers in its front shop. Daily newspapers were provided on a sale or
return basis. In other words any unsold papers were returned the next day and your account would be credited.

If you go into my local Spar just before they close there
is usually bundles of papers tied with string, this is them
preparing for collection the next day. So I presume that sale or return is still operational.

As far as ‘sales automatically generate numbers stocked’.
like you say, I think that has to be nonsense as the number supplied could never go up and also, why do the over supplied rags never go down.

Two little stories for you. I bought the first edition of the National in a shop in Perth, there was only one copy,
which was crumpled up on the bottom shelf. As it happens the only other copy I bought in that shop was a couple of days later and there must have been about thirty copies on the top shelf.

The other day I got it in the coop and the assistant smiled at me and said “I see you read the truth” (insert smiley thing here)

Totally agree. If there are 1.6 million SNP/Yes voters, then only around 12000/1600000 = 0.0075% of them buy the National!

Or put it another way, only about 1 in 10 of SNP members even bother reading it.

Does this mean yes voters have just stopped reading any paper, even the National?

There are definitely issues with low number stocked, alot of outlets dont have them (especially filling stations in my experience) and they are often put out of the way (I often have to hunt around for it) and prone to nob-ends covering them with other papers / turning them back to front.

Even so, 12000???? come on, that cant even be sustainable. Use it or lose it, and go back to NO NON-UNIONIST PAPERS. Is that what you want, people??? If you dont like it for some reason, tell them why.

Interesting reading! Look forward to seeing next set of figures for The National.

I subscribe to The National but also buy one most working days to leave in the canteen for anybody to read. Some No voters seem to be enjoying it – though don’t think they realise it’s a pro-independence paper (figures)… I’ve still to slip that into a conversation ?

I frankly doubt that as much as 803,000 so called Scots bought a daily paper. I suspect that a huge number of that 803,000 are non Scots. What self respecting Scot would buy any of them with the possible exception of the National.

@ neil bruce; I know of at least two nasty Yoon shopkeepers in my home town who hate taking the National. They take so few copies that if I don’t get to the shop before 10 in the morning then they are sold out. I refuse to give any Yoons a regular order though. I was at one shop today for 9 to be greeted by one very crumpled and dirty National left on the shelf, I refused to buy it from the sneering Daily Heil reader that was behind the counter. I elected to drive 10 miles into Elgin from my home to get an unsoiled copy.

We have a huge imbalance in press coverage and along comes a new newspaper that supports Independence and people don’t buy it. I find that incredible and it makes me wonder if people prefer complaining about their lot over actually doing something about it.

We have over 100000 SNP members and apparently around half the population supports Independence and yet we have a paltry number buying the National.

We are never going to get rid of the imbalance in the press if people don’t take opportunities like these. The more people that buy the National, the more airtime it’s journalists will get, which is important if we are serious about winning Independence.

I think the National and the Sunday Herald have a big problem being stablemates with the Herald which looks to have been taking a more SNPBAD line recently.

Even although they are operated semi-independently under their American owner, the perception for many is they are still linked and supporting each other. It does look crazy for a Sunday version of a daily paper to run with a different political viewpoint.

This undoubtedly affects sales for the National. Along with the fact it operates under a shoestring budget.

The Herald and the Scotsman both aim to be Scotland’s national ‘quality’ newspaper, but they both take a unionist editorial view along with all the Scottish versions of the UK newspapers.

It’s absolutely insane – 17 daily papers all pandering to the same political viewpoint at a time when the SNP is over 50% in the polls.

Seems like the common sense way for the Newsquest titles to survive is to merge the Herald/National/Sunday Herald, and run with a consolidated, higher quality general pro-Scottish agenda.
Maybe not so ‘in your face’ as the National. Many readers want a pro-Scotland line, but alongside a wide mix of interesting and entertaining content. They don’t want to feel like they are buying a party political news-leaflet.

That said, I hope the National survives until then and make a point of supporting it. At least we have one pro-Scottish voice in the shops every day. Especially important when an election is coming up.

Every person fed up with unionist press and biased reporting should be buying the national and allow other papers to destroy themselves at their own hand. Once sales go up really high the others might realise their folly.

Yes Stephen , and I read the following today ( however I also remembered reading in December 2015 about IPSA investigating two MP’s whose names were not disclosed by IPSA ) :

Isn’t it Strange too that The Independent Parliamentary Standards Association (Ipsa) has got around yet to judge Alistair Carmichael’s Slander against our First Minister and the French Diplomats.
They spent, sorry, Wasted £1,000,000 om an Inquiry that revealed
Carmichael was a Liar. We have him on film lying and repeating his lies when given the opportunity to come clean, he later admits to be a liar, and 9 months later IPSA haven;t decided
if he is a liar and whether they should do anything about it???

Unbelievable!
Had he been in the SNP he would have been hung up the same day.

As has been pointed out, some people buy more than one paper a day. My tory neighbours buy at least two of the right wing rags, and read from cover to cover. You see, they have not just the money, but also the time.

Who owns the National, people should make their own choice on what they spend their money on. The Yes movement is about changing the system from the grass roots, should we be buying a paper controlled from outside our movement.

The newspaper discussion is a bit squint.
The National is primarily competing with other newspapers for readers, most folk have already moved on from newsprint.I would suggest that the National is trying to be successful in a dwindling market.
My suggestion would be to go to a “big print” edition cos times are a changing

I subscribe to the National for the moment although I see it as a marketing ploy of running with the hare and hunting with the hounds by a Unionist organisation.
From recent events at the company I am undecided as to whether I will renew my, soon to expire, subscription or not.

What is Forsyth on? Thatcher’s henchman who illegally and secretly took the equivalent of £Billions out of Scotland. He should be put in jail.

Scotland is still forced to spend £10Billion a year on Westminster follies. Trident/illegal wars, bankng fraud and tax evasion. Money which could be better spent. Forsyth is a total disgrace. Westminster is taxing the Scottish Oil sector at 60%. Losing thousands of jobs and revenues. Google etc pay 3% tax.

Wales benefits from its proximity to London. People can live in Wales and work in London. Wales was badly treated by Thatcher/Forsyth who shut all the mines etc. Coal (CCS) is half the price of imported Gas. The Tories have stopped coal/steel production and banned wind turbines.

Scotland raises £54Billion in tax revenues. £4Billion goes to pay repayments on debt borrowed and spent in the rest of the UK.

Forsyth is a lying, utter disgrace.

Most of these lyng low lives can’t even read a balance sheet. Westminster is corrupt full of (unelected) Unionist crooks.

It’s badly designed, dry and boring and it doesn’t know what it wants to be
If you want to sell something, it has to taste good or look good or contain something which is good
None of these things are achieved because the front page is terrible so that puts folk off before it gets going

Things that we find interesting are not the same things as casual readers,they’re used to what they’re used to and the National has to pick a commercial approach or it’s gone

We’ve got tons of talented young folk in the design and advertising business they could go to for some ideas to encourage the younger readers, or any readers for that matter

But if you want to attract ex Labour folk you have to give the women something of general interest to them, banging on and on about one subject is a turnoff according to Mrs Dr Jim

The National has to be aware 1st it’s in the entertainment business, 2nd Information, 3rd It’s totally devoid of humour, If it were me I’d give Kevin Bridges space to give folk a laugh, and I think he’d be quite happy to do it

I’m not saying it has to turn into a comic, but it must change or I fear It’s Doomed I tell ye Doomed!

Of course we should. The National has improved continually and is a marvel being run on a shoestring. I’ve no idea what some posters here want. It apparently is too SNP but not SNP enough at the same time.

I think the best suggestion for pro-indy supporters unsure about its credentials is to at least support it when they see a pro-Scottish or anti-Tory story on its front page.

Like the edition today on the fiscal framework with Sturgeon and Swinney on the cover: “A WIN FOR TEAM SCOTLAND”
Stuff like that in the supermarkets is like an election poster for passers by. Building support for the SNP and increasing the likelihood of a majority and another referendum.

Whereas tomorrow’s front page is some rather weak cover story about “How Scots Law is Stigmatising Our Children”.

If they are going to operate as a pro-Scottish, pro-Indy partisan paper, they need to go all in and push that line hard, the same way the Daily Mail does for its audience.

Especially if you have a masthead “The newspaper that supports an independent Scotland”. Why bother going for neutral stories or trying to attract a wider audience?

The way Newsquest operates (from experience) is to drip minimal funding into a new product until such time as it proves it can survive (not necessarily even make a profit).

I have no doubt the people on the National would like it to be everything you and others wish it to be. But until Newsquest decides to back it with substantial funds, it can’t be. It will be operating on a tiny editorial budget, utterly dependent on the Herald’s distribution system, and probably having its newsprint and office overheads subsidised too.

Newsquest will make it operate like that for anything up to two years. They will be watching its ability to command loyalty, and its ability to attract advertising. At some point, they will take the decision either to back it or pull the plug. They will be utterly hard-nosed about this.

Their way of thinking is that if you launch a new product, you don’t throw masses of money at it immediately, only to see it go tits up in a year or two. You make it fight at survival level for long enough to show that further investment would be justified.

You can believe that the team at the National would like nothing better than to produce a wonderful tabloid to compete with the DR tomorrow. But that’s not the way Newsquest operates. Which is one of the reasons it is successful – while Johnston Press, etc are not.

Among the products which Newsquest backs to the hilt, are ‘The Strad’ (for string players) and ‘Boxing News’ (launched 1909). So it’s not averse to niche markets, or successful regional newspapers – it’s just very careful where it puts its cash.

Retailers order through the till sales. As orders sell out, it automatically increases orders.

Westminster censors and controls the Press. Cameron/Clegg put the Police into the Guardian and threatened the Editor over the Glenwald/Snowden revelations. The Guardian is the only Independent paper in the UK, because of it’s constitution. The Editor got side-stepped. The Guardian now tows the Westminster line. Westminster uses secret ‘D’ notices to control the Press. The Press are not allowed to report on the ‘D’ notice.

The UK does not have a balanced Press. Majority right wing. Without a free and balanced Press, there is no Democracy. Thatcher broke the Ministerial Code to hand the Times/Sun Group over to Murdoch control. The Times former editor wrote an article about it. The Official papers were released last year under the 30 year rule. i.e. Official Secrets Act. Tax evading Non Doms control the Press. Express, Mail. Times/Sun. Newsquest a US company benefits from UK Gov printing
contracts. Newquest is a worldwide company printing literature for private education. JP benefits from printing Labour/Unionist contracts.

Most newspaper groups are printing companies. Printing publicity leaflets, gov literature, school literature etc. Murdoch benefited from threatening the politicians for an unfair share of the market for political supported Press/TV.

“The National has to be aware 1st it’s in the entertainment business, 2nd Information, 3rd It’s totally devoid of humour”

—–

That’s where the UK/English newspapers with a Scottish edition have a huge advantage. They can pad out their ‘Scottish’ editions with general UK and international content from the much bigger English editions.. showbiz, health, technology, etc

The National doesn’t have the resources for that or to support a wider range of journalism.

So if it is going to be an all-out partisan pro-indy political paper then it needs to just do that and do it well, without any of the wishy-wash.

The George Hotel in Edinburgh has huge piles of Times Newspapers lying about the bar and reception area free for anyone to take. However, at 10pm, there is no discernible reduction in the height of the stacks. On a modest count, there’s around 400 papers throughout the hotel. Maybe folk take a few to to stuff in their Churches shoes when they get wet.

@ Dr Jim, anent the National, no accounting for taste, if U don’t like it don’t buy it. Fred absolutely loves it & walks about three miles every morning in total to get it, having bought the Herald for 35 years pre-Gardham.

Last post was not factually accurate. NCR has not “gone” from Dundee though is but a shadow of it’s former self.

There were over 100 different skills and 25 different products being made and it was never just about the machines; NCR had a pipe band, a golf club, an operatic society and a highly successful football team.

The staff surged to over 6,000 by the end of the 1960s as the country prepared for decimalisation — when old pounds, shillings and pence were replaced by the current monetary system.

In its heyday, the factory’s output was £26 million and it was making 25 different products.
In its heyday, the factory’s output was £26 million and it was making 25 different products.
By 1971 output was £26 million but things were starting to change. The previous year there were 425 jobs cut, leaving a workforce of 4,840.

By 1978 the Dundee staff numbered 1,000 and all eyes were on the latest innovation — the automatic teller machine. Two years later the corporate board in Ohio gave

Dundee NCR the charter to design, develop and manufacture ATMs and now they are everywhere.

NCR’s hardest day was in December 2007 when 650 were let go and their jobs given to workers in Hungary. But that was eight years ago and NCR is still part of Dundee.

The company now employs around 500 workers in the city, mainly in software engineering and in research and development.

@Iain More
“I frankly doubt that as much as 803,000 so called Scots bought a daily paper. I suspect that a huge number of that 803,000 are non Scots. What self respecting Scot would buy any of them with the possible exception of the National.”

I would say at least 50% of Scottish newspaper buyers buy it for the fitba and racing and,… no, that’s it.

I subscribe to the National for the moment although I see it as a marketing ploy of running with the hare and hunting with the hounds by a Unionist organisation.
From recent events at the company I am undecided as to whether I will renew my, soon to expire, subscription or not.”

I don’t buy the National for my benefit. I skim through it.

I buy the National to get its sales up so people who are not yet convinced on Independence are more likely to read it.

We have to stop this purity nonsense that we can’t support something because it is not perfect or has some flaw. We are not going to win Independence if we put obstacles in our way.

Marcia says: “Having not purchased a newspaper for some time I found it awkward buying the National and Sunday Herald. I just got out of the habit of buying papers. When finished reading the paper I leave it on top of the free Metro’s that can be had on Dundee’s buses.”

Weel dunn, Marcia! Mind you, Dundee is hardly the sort of city that needs “re-educating”. There’s nae flies on the good people of our biggest YES city.

[However, I would like to point out that Glesga gave the most entertaining rebuff to Bitter Together: The Imperial Masters march when the 100 Labour MPs caught the train up to Central Station to lecture us on how we should vote]

Absolutely spot on George. If people want Scotland to become Independent they have to do something about it such as supporting those who are trying to support us. Mumping and moaning about the corrupt media, bias and propaganda day after and we get the chance for the first time in decades (ever?) to have a Sunday paper (Sunday Herald) and a Daily (The National) on our side and what? The Scots uncanny knack of cutting off their nose to spite their face. The SCUM journalists must be hee-hawing their heads off reading some of the posts on here. I’ve also got my suspicions that there are a number of people who post on here that don’t actually support Independence at all.

I don’t think it’s a question of whether I like the National or not Fred, I’m already sold on Independence so it doesn’t need to talk to me, I already know what’s in it

The audience it needs to be talking to are the ones who gripe about the rest of us and read other stuff
The amount of women I see on a regular basis buying papers to take home for their elderly husbands or Fathers or just the habit formed brigade who walk in to the store buy the Daily drivel of their choice and leave without even looking at it, because they know that there’s Footy or a Crossword or a recipe or whatever

It’s all very well to be a purist and go out of business with your head and principles held high but if you don’t do the job you set out to do in convincing others to join the cause you believe in then pride is wee bit pointless

Because the age group who mostly don’t read the National are the people we need and if it can appeal to that group in some way then “Bingo” you’re selling papers in exactly the same way as The Sun, The Record or any of the other drivel

Print newspapers are a propaganda tool so why not use it in that same way

Regards internet access, all of the no voters that I knew of, had super duper computers internet, and were sent links with factual info etc. It mattered not a jot. They all ignored the alternative information, preferring to believe what the bbc and their tory rags told them.,

The young have 24/7 internet, mostly, and of course 16/17 yr olds can vote in the Scottish election in May, but not in camorons referendum. They are very aware mostly, of what’s going on, though the trolls are attempting to stifle the information getting through.

Not sure what age they are being allowed to vote in NI and in Wales in May.

OT.
Robert Peffers…. Or anyone else who knows this stuff!
There is a comment with a link over on WGD about Michael Forysyth introducing some sort of wording into the Scotland Bill.
It’s looking (to me) like a back door attempt to establish the absolute superiority of Westminster in the guise of the permanence of Holyrood being written in to law.

I know not everyone here agrees that the Constutional stuff is a priority but for those who do could some of you check it out,cause everyone pretty much agrees Forsythe’s a sneaky establishment basturt.
While it only “might” help to figure out if they are at it…It certainly can’t hurt to take a look to see why this wording matters.
Oh and don’t for get to let us all know.

I’d be interested to know if there’s been a decline in the number of households that have canaries and parakeets as I once heard someone say that most newspapers are only good for lining the bottom of bird cages.
Personally, I get all my news online; The Nat., Wings and Newsnet.scot., with Derek Bateman.

Why does the National have next to no adverts in it? The biggest ads in the national are by The National. The Fife Leader has more ads, The Glaswegian has more ads, every local gazette that gets thrown in a close or through a letter box has more ads.

Newspapers are put together advert space first and everything else fits around. I don’t read the Herald, but does it have lots of ads? Does the Sunday Herald? What is the value of an empoyee that can bring in £1000 worth of adverts a week? How much does it cost to advertise in the national? Why are there next to no adverts? On the surface it makes no sense.

The National feels very climsy when you pick it up. The Sun, Record, Express, Mail have a rhobust weighty feel, that might suggest value for money is to be had. Adverts help pay for people to write the fluff that people like to read on lunch breaks, on trains and buses…stuff to skim, if you can’t be bothered reading the heavy stuff. Life’s heavy as it is, it’s 8am, you’re half asleep…mibbe read the serious stuff later.

The National has no fluff. Sure, we don’t need the fluff, but you catch bees with honey. None of my yes voting mates or relatives buy The National regularly if at all. And my old boy still has his SNP posters on his windows, and he still gets his Courier every morning, and it takes him a few sittings to get through it.

I don’t blame anyone who writes or works for The National, but something’s not right. It does not function like other newspapers, and that is detrimental to something or other we all hold dear. It’s a skinny Barlinnie in world of tailor mades.

@Liz g
(OT)
Forsyth is a weird one, doesn’t know whether it’s a shit or a heartburn (pardon the language). Jim Wallace used to be sound accroding to Dorice who knew him (Dorice used to be a very well respected Indy poster on the Grun), but Wallace went well Unionist years ago, and a bit anti-Scotland into the bargain.

Dunlop I don’t really know, was OK on this. Keen is a new one, was Conservative party chairman in Scotland but was Dean of the Faculty of Advocates, now Attorney General for Scotland. Has been outspoken against Tory policy at times, might be fairly straight who knows? I hope so, unlike his predecessor Wallace. Kerr I can’t remember, seemed straight on this, Stephen seems to be a blowhard, but then the LibDems seem to be the worst Lords of the lot – very anti.

Yes, there’s potential for problems, but I think the Lords will just let this one go, bigger fish to fry now.

Wouldn’t it be good if we had a major pro-Scottish online paper or blog to rival the Scotsman website ? (Obviously it would be even better if a pro-indy group with deep pockets bought out the paper)

It’s unfortunate, but the digital readership of the Scotsman is far higher than the print edition so they still get their propaganda out to a large number of people, especially with no paywall like the Herald.

And if you ignore the political stuff, their website actually has some good general interest content. But the arch-unionist angle and the nutter commentators who loiter there are unbearable. The ‘Scotsman’ in their target audience must have a masochistic personality disorder.. constantly reading about how shit and useless they are.

It’s great to have political blogs like Wings and the other pro-indy sites, but they are never going to attract as wide an audience as a major news and entertainment site, so there is always an element of preaching to the converted.

Just don’t know if there is enough money to be made online to build an alternative Scottish portal with a mixture of pro-indy political articles and general interest content.
Enough to pay contributors enough to provide local content that draws in a wider audience. Music, Food+Drink, business, lifestyle, humour etc
The Caledonian Mercury never succeeded but had too few updates and was still pretty limited in scope. Bella / Commonspace have a more varied mix now but still mostly political and often come across as oh so righteous and worthy and serious.

Maybe we will see some of the political and lifestyle blogs combine into one larger Scottish portal.

Training day
“I picture the likes of Tom Gordon and David Clegg as the colony leader in that episode of the Twilight Zone, the man who thought he was indispensable to those he thought he led, left stranded on a hostile planet as his people are evacuated, forlornly shouting into a wilderness ‘come back!’ as his voice recedes to nothingness..”

@ Cadogan Enright – you’re right. The National has some excellent articles. I have a subscription as it’s hard to get in local shops. But I still buy a hard copy sometimes as it’s easier to read.
Hope you feel better soon. Luckily you still have internet access!

Liz I’ve just started wading my way through this and Michael Forsyth so-called Scot has got RIGHT up my nose already!!!!!!!! My blood is boiling and it’s not even 8am yet.

We know that the Scottish Parliament isn’t permanent at all, although that WAS part of the VOW. If a majority of Scots want to dissolve it, so be it. Forsyth now wants the vote to dissolve the SP to be UK wide. UNBELIEVABLE!

Anyway having to go out so can’t check anymore.

”Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con): My Lords, I thank the Minister for enabling us to have the fiscal framework before we complete consideration of the Bill.

*****To paraphrase Robert Burns, now that the First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, has been bought and sold with English gold,*****

could my noble friend give an assurance that the same generosity that has been given to Scotland will be applied to England, to the English regions, to Northern Ireland and to Wales? In particular, could he confirm the briefing that was given to the Times by a “Treasury insider” that, had this settlement been in place since 1999, Scotland would have got all the money from Barnett—that is, 20% more per head than in England—plus an additional £6 billion? If so, surely the rest of the United Kingdom is entitled to be treated with similar generosity.

When the Minister says that this is a transitional arrangement for five years that will be subject to agreement, is not another way of putting that there will be a veto on the part of the Scottish Government to prevent any change? Does he really think that this delivers a deal that is fair to all parts of the United Kingdom?”

…………………………………

Foulkes actually makes a decent point for once however it’s tempered by remembering that he and his ilk warned us about this if we voted Yes!

‘Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Lab): While I join in the welcome given to the Statement and the agreement, is the Minister aware that at this very moment HMRC offices in Scotland are being closed and thousands of people put on the dole? Is not this a stupid thing to do at a time when there are going to be more responsibilities on revenue and customs in Scotland?’

……….

‘Baroness Goldie (Con): My Lords, I, too, commend my noble friend Lord Dunlop for his perseverance, stoicism and patience in bringing these important negotiations to a conclusion. Does he consider that the real clout to be delivered to Scottish politics by the Bill and this fiscal framework agreement is to relish the prospect of a very reluctant SNP Government being compelled to accept fiscal and economic responsibility for their political decision-making, and that one of the most important components of any review will not be what happens in this place, the other place or in the Scottish Parliament but will be the views and expressions of the Scottish electorate, who may be suffering from the impost of some of the Scottish Government’s policies?’

………..

‘Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con): My Lords, we had quite a good discussion about this in Committee. This amendment, together with Amendments 4 and 5 in my name, is centred on the question of the extent to which we wish to maintain the sovereignty of this United Kingdom Parliament and the extent to which we wish to litter our legislation with declaratory statements that have no meaning whatever in order to make political capital on the part of the Government or someone else.

Regarding the Statement delivered a few moments ago, at first I thought that my noble friend had misread it when he referred to “Scotland’s two Governments”. Scotland has a United Kingdom Government and a devolved Scottish Government, but this use of language, which is designed to appease the separatists, is now being included in our legislation. Amendment 1 would simply put back into the Bill the original drafting that the Government presented to the House of Commons. The wording proposed in my amendment was perfectly satisfactory to the Government because it reflected the Government’s position, but the wording was changed to meet an amendment put forward by, I think, the Scottish nationalists.

There is a great irony here. My amendment is about the authority and nature of the United Kingdom’s constitutional arrangements. I—perhaps rather naively—thought that the Scottish nationalists were in favour of breaking up those arrangements, and I did not really understand why a Conservative and unionist Government would wish to help them in that process. At present, line 9 on page 1 of the Bill reads:

“The Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government are a permanent part of the United Kingdom’s constitutional arrangements”.

My amendment would simply put back the words “recognised as” so that the Bill read, “The Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government are recognised as a permanent part of the United Kingdom’s constitutional arrangements”. If the words “recognised as” are included, that implies that there is another body that recognises that—that body being the United Kingdom Parliament. However, the statement currently in the Bill as amended by the nationalists in the other place flies in the face of our constitutional tradition that no Parliament can bind its successors. It also flies in the face of the Government’s own rule that legislation should not be used for declaratory purposes.

We had indeed a very long debate about this in Committee, but I have looked in vain for any amendments from the Government to address any of the arguments that were put forward. The Constitution Committee produced a very serious report. The noble and learned Lord, Lord Hope of Craighead, spoke at great length. There were a number of contributions, but all of them have been ignored. They have all been ignored because the Government’s mantra is, “We have to implement what the Smith commission report indicated and there can be no departure from it”. But, of course, this clause is a departure from the commission’s proposals.

My Amendment 4 provides that, on page 1, line 17, we should leave out “Scotland” and insert “the United Kingdom”. As currently drafted, the Bill provides:

“In view of that commitment it is declared that the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government are not to be abolished except on the basis of a decision of the people of Scotland voting in a referendum”.

********* My amendment would make it a decision of the people of the United Kingdom voting in a referendum, because we are still a United Kingdom and, indeed, the Scottish people have only very recently voted overwhelmingly to achieve that.*********

I thought that my noble friend would accept my amendment in Committee—I realised that he would have to go away and think about it—but perhaps he will now accept my Amendment 5, which provides:

“Nothing in this section alters the sovereignty of the United Kingdom Parliament”.

What has become of us that a Conservative and unionist Government are making declaratory legislation on the face of a Bill but are not prepared to accept as an amendment the words:

“Nothing in this section alters the sovereignty of the United Kingdom Parliament”?

No doubt there will be an opportunity for us to discuss the fiscal framework when we get the fiscal framework, but, looking at the Statement that has been made, where we have given the Scottish Parliament a veto on the terms by which it is financed—we have given that away—I have to say to my noble friend that we appear to be engaged in a long-term process of appeasement which undermines the authority of the United Kingdom Parliament. These amendments are an attempt, in at least a declaratory form, to set the record straight. I beg to move.’

‘Lord Cormack (Con): My Lords, Amendment 3 is in my name. I moved a similar amendment in Committee and expressed the hope, as did the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hope, and my noble friend Lord Forsyth of Drumlean, that there would be some response from the Government. I do not think any one of us is suggesting that our individual solutions are perfect, but clarity is certainly needed. We need to reflect, particularly this afternoon, having heard a Statement, to which we will doubtless return on Monday, that is fraught with danger for the future of the United Kingdom. It is tremendously important in that context that the supremacy of the United Kingdom Parliament should be specifically acknowledged in one way or another.

Where I differ from the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hope, is that I do not want the ultimate decision to be made in a referendum, if it comes—I hope it will not, but it might—to the abolition of the Scottish Parliament.

****** The Scottish Parliament was the creation of the United Kingdom Parliament. If it is to be abolished at any time—I reiterate my hope and belief that it will not be—it is crucial that the final word should be with the United Kingdom Parliament. *****

It may well be that part of such a process would be a referendum. I do not particularly like referenda, but they are now part of our constitutional system and, like them or not, we all have to accept that. But I believe fundamentally in parliamentary democracy. Therefore, it is crucial that the ultimate decision should be made in Parliament and should be made in the elected House. Of course your Lordships’ House should have a constructive part to play. Of course it should scrutinise any legislation that is placed before Parliament. But ultimately, this should be the decision of the elected House.

I am conscious that small majorities can sometimes provoke great wrath and dissension, so I have made a suggestion in my amendment and it is here for noble Lords to see. There would have to be,

***** “a two-thirds majority in a vote of the House of Commons in which 75 per cent of the members elected by Scottish constituencies voted for abolition”. *****

I do not put that before noble Lords as the ultimate panacea, but something along those lines would go a long way to reassure those of us who are concerned for the long-term future of the United Kingdom. I am sure that everyone in your Lordships’ House at least shares that concern. I made similar points in Committee and expressed the hope that the Minister would reflect and that we would see the results of his reflection when we came to Report, but there is no sign of that. It is a great pity, because if we truly believe in the United Kingdom, it follows, as night follows day, that we believe in the supremacy of the United Kingdom Parliament. There has to be something in this Bill, either along the lines of the amendment moved by my noble friend Lord Forsyth or of mine, as well as taking up some of the points made by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hope. It is just not good enough to leave the Bill as it is.

In all that has been going on over the past few months, there is an element of the paying of Danegeld. Those who pay Danegeld rarely get value for money, and I think we should bear that carefully in mind.’

“Above all, will the new programme accept its own vital role in extending Scottish democracy and start treating constitutional change like a popular political reality not a tatty conspiracy against all things sacred? Unpicking the Scottish cringe and its associated reflex reactions from several generations of reporters and production staff will be tough.

And that’s my main argument against the BBC – the ethos.

It’s entirely at odds with Scotland’s politics, culture, and economic situation. It does not support its indigenous talent beyond a third-rate soap opera, and a few token gestures. Musicians, writers, and our internationally renown artists get short measure.

As currently constituted and motivated, BBC has no will to present Scotland’s political ambitions as anything but a provincial sideshow.

That’s why a new broadcasting company is a must. It might well attract the disgruntled (and talented, I hope) from BBC Scotland as employees, but it has to begin by being wholly oriented Scotland-international.

BBC Scotland see our ‘news’ as bagpipes left on a train, but above all, self-determination as sedition.

Even this morning, the Flying Scotsman was portrayed as a JK Rowling invention that goes to Hogwarts. The locomotive and its legend was created 60 bloody years before she sipped coffee in her local cafe as a struggling single mother, and hit on the idea to siphoned off the ten most popular elements from classic children’s novels for her public school puddings.

We are still getting inculcated with alien culture and cod history.

For my part I’m left with the unpleasant memory of BBC Controller (some title!”) arrogantly dismissing Professor Robertson’s research on BBC bias, and informing on him to his university boss.

That one example is supreme among many examples of the British government at work.

I’ve supported the SNP all my adult life, but always bought the record, until the referendum run-up, when I started looking more closely into politics. The main reason I bought it, in all honesty, was that it had the clearest racing pages.

The National’s owners should take note. Most people with no particular views on politics but for other reasons. The National should be more amenable to this sector, then more will see what they’re saying on other pages.

Still no racing info, which is disappointing, Try to appeal to more of the common people.

” … I’ve also got my suspicions that there are a number of people who post on here that don’t actually support Independence at all.”

I believe you are correct in that belief, Petra. While I can respect, and engage in debate, with those who post here openly opposing Scottish independence. I have absolutely no respect for those who claim to support independence but constantly attempt to undermine it.

Mind you I cannot thole those unionist trolls how openly, and knowingly, post obvious lies here.

‘Lord Empey (UUP): My Lords, if I may follow the point just made by the noble Lord, Lord McCluskey, I said in Committee that I believed the outcome of the Smith commission had the status of a treaty. I did not say that in any negative fashion, but I have seen all this before. Once these deals are done, we are going through the motions here. There is a political imperative: all the Front Benches signed up to whatever happened a week or 10 days before the referendum. What we have before us is the same procedure that flows from Europe, goes into the mixer in Whitehall and comes out as Smith-plus. That is where we are. It does not matter what the merits are of the amendments of the noble Lords, Lord Norton of Louth, and Lord Forsyth, or of any other noble Lord. The political decision has been taken and the Front Benches are paralysed, because they have reached a position, for political reasons. We know it, all noble Lords know it; the dogs in the street know it. That is where we are.

Lord Forsyth of Drumlean: Is the noble Lord suggesting that we are all wasting our time?

Lord Empey: Perish the thought of such an outrageous consideration, but I suspect that the Government will be impervious to our arguments, if I might put it that way. The reason is that a political decision has been taken. We all know that. I happen to think that the Front Benches are wrong. I have had many years of experience of dealing with nationalism. It is a perfectly legitimate aspiration, in Wales, in Scotland, in Ireland or anywhere. There is nothing wrong with it. It is part of our national life. However, it is a fundamental mistake to believe that if you give folk the power, they will make such a mess of it that the people will be relieved to get rid of it when the time comes. That is not going to happen.

I think the noble Lord, Lord Cormack, referred to the Danegeld. We have been doing this in Ireland for years—decades—and all it has done is grow, sustain and feed the forces that are anti-British. We will have later amendments where the very word “British” is the issue, irrespective of the substance of the matter we are debating. Therefore, I understand where the Minister is at. He is a very articulate and capable Minister but he has a concrete block and there is nothing he can do with it except present it to us and, sooner or later, it will be nodded through. I understand the politics of this. I understand that an arrangement was entered into by the three main party leaders in September 2014. I regret that that happened, but it has happened. I also recall receiving an answer from the noble and learned Lord, Lord Wallace of Tankerness, in his role as Advocate-General, when I asked him about the sovereignty issue and which Parliament was superior. Of course, he said that ultimately, the United Kingdom Parliament was the superior body.

We have already heard that an agreement on the fiscal framework will have to be reached between the two Administrations, as we call them. Nomenclature is a big deal because the phrase “UK Government” now has to be used in everything. That creeps in and we have had it in our part of the world for many years. All these things are a creeping barrage, and they go on. We have decided to allow them to go on in the hope that the fire will pass over, and we will come out of our bunkers and hope that nationalism will have burnt itself out and destroyed itself. However, I argue that we are feeding the flames. However meritorious and important it is to draw attention to these things and to put them on the record, I argue that the status of the Smith commission report is not that of just any report; it has the status, effectively, of a treaty. That is a very dangerous position for us to be in, but it is where I believe we are. I hope the Minister will be able to shoot down my arguments one by one and convince us all that this is a complete mirage and a misunderstanding.’

Thanks for the link. interesting reading. Their arrogance is astonishing.

Personally, I think all TV news should come from Scotland.

There is, however, an astonishly simple step the BBC could take to dramatically improve the present UK and International level news output – all they need to do is shift all domestic English education, health, etc reports out of the ‘main’ UK wide news and into the England only slots.

This would leave ‘main’ news focusing on genuine UK wide issues and world news.

I don’t see why this would incur any significant extra costs.

Or, in their arrogance and ignorance, does something so simple not occur to them?

‘Lord McAvoy (Lab): My Lords, for the removal of any doubt, I do not support any amendments in this group. But I am pleased to be given the chance to try again to pronounce the name of the noble Lord, Lord Louth of Norton—I have done it again—the noble Lord, Lord Norton of Louth, because he is a profound constitutional expert and he has my total admiration and respect, and I apologise for the mix-up.

The original draft of Clause 1 conveyed the permanency of the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government as institutions but our amendments put their permanency beyond any doubt and put the decision of whether they should be permanent in the hands of the Scottish people. We do not want any change to this aspect of the Bill. It is with some trepidation that I enter this debate, with so many constitutional experts, lawyers and esteemed legal people, but there we are; I might bring the perspective of an ordinary Scottish person without having all those grand titles—which are all deserved, I hasten to add.

I do not think we should spend too long on this aspect of the Bill. We support the Scottish people having the final say on any of these matters. Without going too much into the history of things, in 1707 Scotland entered the United Kingdom as a full country. It did not sacrifice totally its right to have its own say. We entered as an equal partner. I think we have played our part, pro rata, on an equal basis. I believe strongly that that should be the case. The sovereignty of the Scottish people should be recognised. It is not a coincidence that one of our monarchs in Scotland, Mary, Queen of Scots, was not known as the Queen of Scotland. Of course, her final legacy was that every monarch of Scotland and the United Kingdom since her death has been her direct descendant. That is totally in tune with the Scottish people. The Scottish people should have the say. I am sorry to say it but particularly the amendment tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Cormack, to take everything away from the Scottish people is just not acceptable or realistic. Realpolitik has been mentioned and that is absolutely right.

I do not want to feed the flames but I say to the noble Lord, Lord Empey, that he could have been a bit more careful with his words, bearing in mind the history of Northern Ireland. My party and I—and, I believe, the Government—are not feeding any flames. I believe in the merits of what we have here, not just as expediency or something passed down from on high. I believe firmly in it and if any of these amendments are pressed, we will be voting against them.’

Thanks for bringing the text over from WGD.
Sorry to have made you so mad at the start of the day,but there isn’t really a good time to listen to the vermin in ermine.

Yesindyref2 @ 3.53
Hope you’re right,I’m just aware that changing a word or two in a Leagal document can take the interpretation of it in a whole different direction.
And that they would if they could try to circumvent a second referendum.

I doubt Forsyth has a country he calls home, but he does have a state he loves, oh yes. The same goes for every member of that unelected chamber. You need to be real ‘special’ to have earned those robes.

All that clever word play giving them the opportunity to feel smug and superior. Sounds quite off hand the way they discuss removing the rights of people doesn’t it?

They’re all ‘noble’ friends too and all without any of them understanding the meaning of the word. How very cosy for them.

Our Parliament / Government WAS to be permanent and then the ‘Referendum’ part was added last September.

………………….

The Advocate-General for Scotland (Lord Keen of Elie) (Con): ……

‘I thank noble Lords for their careful and detailed consideration of Clause 1, which expresses in law the understood position that the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government are a permanent part of the United Kingdom’s constitutional arrangements. I will endeavour to respond to each of the points made and, in doing so, I thought that it would be helpful to reflect on the adjustments made to this clause during the Bill’s passage through Parliament.

The Smith commission said that the United Kingdom’s legislation,

“will state that the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government are permanent institutions”.

In the draft legislation which the Government published in January 2015, the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government were recognised as permanent parts of the United Kingdom’s constitutional arrangements.

***** At that stage, the clause did not contain a provision on a referendum. This drafting was retained when the Bill was introduced to Parliament in May 2015. Detailed feedback was then received on the clause during the Bill’s passage through the other place and from others such as the Scottish Parliament’s Devolution (Further Powers) Committee. The Government reflected carefully on this feedback and on 18 September, the Prime Minister announced the Government’s intention to include a referendum provision in the clause to strengthen the provision and underline our commitment to the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government. Following refinement of the drafting, the clause as it now appears was inserted into the Bill on Report in the other place. *****

I pause to observe in response to the observations of the noble and learned Lord, Lord McCluskey, that I am not aware of any understanding between the United Kingdom Government and the Scottish Government to the effect that no amendment will be allowed to the provisions of Clause 1 or to any other part of the Bill. The clause was also subject to substantial debate during our Committee in December.

I turn to Amendment 2, tabled by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hope of Craighead, and the noble Lord, Lord Norton of Louth. This amendment considers the specific wording of subsection section in Clause 1. Following our deliberations in Committee we have reflected carefully on this amendment, which I believe seeks to clarify details of the operation of such a referendum. None the less, our view remains that the current wording of the clause delivers the outcome needed effectively, as it reflects that in 2014 the people of Scotland voted to remain in the United Kingdom and that that would mean a commitment to two Parliaments.

New subsection (3) ensures that if the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government were ever to be abolished, which of course is a scenario that no one is envisaging, the people of Scotland would need to vote in a referendum to that effect.

The noble Lord, Lord Cormack, spoke to Amendment 3, which would replace the requirement for a decision of the people of Scotland in a referendum with a requirement for a two-thirds majority in a vote of the House of Commons, in which 75% of Scottish Members of Parliament voted in favour. I am grateful to the noble Lord for the points he has made and recognise his desire to underline the centrality of this Parliament in determining the constitutional arrangements of the United Kingdom. However, it remains our view that it is right to include provision for a referendum of the people of Scotland in the clause to strengthen the political statement, and to underline the commitment of this Parliament and this Government to the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government.

The referendum provision rightly reflects the importance of the people of Scotland in determining Scotland’s constitutional future. In the referendum in 1997, the people of Scotland overwhelmingly supported the creation of a Scottish Parliament. In the independence referendum in 2014, they reaffirmed that they wanted to have two Parliaments by voting to remain within the United Kingdom.

Although the abolition of the Scottish Parliament and Government has never been envisaged, it is right that if it were ever to be, it should be on the basis of a decision of the people of Scotland. It is important to be clear there are no circumstances in which the abolition of the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government is envisaged. People in Scotland voted for two Parliaments, and that is what they shall have. However, in responding to these points, I would state that, in this entirely hypothetical circumstance, this Parliament would of course play its full and proper role, just as it did in the establishment of the Scottish Parliament in 1998. That was of course a matter that we addressed in some detail in Committee.

Amendment 6, tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Norton of Louth, would replace Clause 1 in the Bill with a new clause which would provide for a referendum before the Scottish Parliament and Government could be abolished and define those eligible to vote in such a referendum as those entitled to vote in local government elections in Scotland. As a number of noble Lords noted during our debate in Committee, we are dealing in entirely hypothetical circumstances. Such a referendum is not envisaged, but in those hypothetical circumstances, the precise detail of such a referendum would of course have to be determined, as is the case with any referendum, if such a scenario were ever to occur.

The proposed new clause also seeks to acknowledge concerns raised by some noble Lords in Committee with regard to the wording and effect of the clause. It states that the sections of the Scotland Act 1998 establishing the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government will not be repealed unless electors in Scotland vote for this in a referendum, and does not directly reference the permanence of the Scottish Parliament. We have carefully reflected on these points since Committee, and our view remains that the clause as drafted is appropriate. The Smith commission said:

***** “UK legislation will state that the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government are permanent institutions”. *****

We consider it important that the clause reflects the language of the Smith agreement, in order to underline the political statement being made. I emphasise, as has been acknowledged by your Lordships, that it is a political statement. The purpose of the clause is to reflect in legislation the political understanding which already exists. It is our view that Clause 1, as drafted, benefits from this straightforward, unambiguous statement, in keeping with Section 1 of the Scotland Act 1998, which states:

Indeed. The up front Unionist posters serve a purpose. They offer debate and present opportunities to challenge their assertions, which is useful reading for others. Fair enough.

However, I reckon some posts are pushing devolution solutions just a little too strongly. I believe the devolution road is literally never ending because it takes years to squeeze tiny increments out of WM. All the evidence is laid out from the past 20 years to show that WM will implement only the minimum Devo it thinks it can get away with. At some point they may say, enough, no further.

The truth is we take Indy, we have to be given Devo. When I see language implying DevoMax is actually achievable, I get suspicious of motives.

Devolution has caused more people to think about self determination, good. However, I am sure to many at WM, devolution is seen as a delaying, appeasing, deflecting strategy.

We can demand DevoMax as a political tactic. However, that is quite different from any expectation that WM will ever deliver it.

We have an element (watered down) of devo.
We have a no-detriment clause in the agreement which means we are free to raise revenue from the sparse powers we have.

we have heard from the unionist cartel that we have to make ‘hard’ choices about robbing Peter to pay Paul but the reality is that both Peter and Paul are being robbed.

Right now in a time where Westminster elites are robbing us blind by imposing a govt surplus whilst getting us all into more personal debt we should be innovating.

Countries all over Europe have been using financial innovation because of the artificial scarcity of the EURO and the absolute power of the troika.

So we need to start a parallel currency. We have a fantastic framework proposed by the New Economics Foundation called Scotpound.

This currency can be issued into existence by scotgov to stimulate the Scottish economy. It could be done now within the existing setup. What it means is that we can increase the purchasing power into the economy without continuous taxation or borrowing. It sounds radical but has been practised throughout history with most notable examples being championed by presidents Lincoln and Jackson in America.

So what are we going to do? Wait for independence on a plate or show the world the scots are indeed innovators and can make a country flourish.

We can spend the next 5 years talking or we can spend it taking action.

It’s what people voted for in the Referendum. FFA/Home rule. 70% want devo max. They did not vote YES. The Referendum was not fair. Westminster is corrupt. Voters are seeing the promises have not been kept. People are seeing how much better a Devolved Scottish gov works. In spite of the scare stories. They will vote for Independence

Even if a majority had voted YES there would have been a period of time to decouple. That is beginning to happen now. The Scottish Gov is protecting Scotland and demanding that the full promises are kept. The people in Scotland are more confident. There will be another IndyRef, when people will vote YES. Scotland has Westminster over a barrel. Keep the promises or else.

Joanna Cherry said something about the sovereignty issue last week in the commons. In replying to Cameron it went something like, the PM will rattle a hornets nest if he tries to force Westminster sovereignty over the Scottish people.

@ liz g says at 8:53 am ….. Petra …. Thanks for bringing the text over from WGD. Sorry to have made you so mad at the start of the day, but there isn’t really a good time to listen to the vermin in ermine.’

I’m actually sitting here laughing now Liz. I should have left the house at 9am but haven’t had a thing to eat or a shower. I suppose passing on the vermins proposals are of more importance in the scheme of things.

@ Macart says at 8:54 am ….. ‘Petra …. I doubt Forsyth has a country he calls home, but he does have a state he loves, oh yes. The same goes for every member of that unelected chamber. You need to be real ‘special’ to have earned those robes. All that clever word play giving them the opportunity to feel smug and superior. Sounds quite off hand the way they discuss removing the rights of people doesn’t it? They’re all ‘noble’ friends too and all without any of them understanding the meaning of the word. How very cosy for them. Who knew?’

Well Macart I reckon most people on here have a very good understanding of what makes them tick and it’s not a love of Scotland. The whole kit and caboodle don’t seem to have a home at all. All riding together on the gravy train … to wherever it may take them. The sooner we get out of this Better Together Union the …. Better. Leave the rotten, corrupt, mouldering, totally archaic House of Lords to rUK if that’s what they want and why they would is WAY beyond me.

PS …. I could only read so far into that document so there may be more relevant data there.

Sorry if I’ve missed responding to anyones post but I’ll have to move my backside.

The voters off the Roll are transit voters. Students etc from elsewhere. University can’t register students en masse. New voters have to register individually from a current address, with identity. To prevent fraud.

If the debates of last June illustrated anything, it was the reluctance of both chambers to look at the federal solution. FFA amendment from the Scottish benches binned out of hand and by overwhelming vote.

The HoL is irrelevant. It has absolutely no power. It can delay a Bill twice. The House of Lords should be abolished. In the context if Ireland the unelected House of Lords caused the trouble.

A Home Rule Bill for Ireland was passed in the Commons in April 1914. The House of Lords (when it did have power) delayed it until Sept 1916, to come into statute. That started the trouble. The 11WW intervened. Unionists in Ulster started to arm supported by the Britush Army Command in Ulster.

The House of Lords started the trouble in Ireland which led to Partition. Someone should maybe tell them. If they can be bothered.

The National web site has a paywall.
It is preaching to the converted and will never have a mass audience.

Subscribing instead of buying It in the shops is more likely to lead to the print edition closing down and the paper going online only. If the print edition had twice the sales it is going to get better distribution, and importantly papers on the newsstands act as political billboards helping to influence public opinion.

“Liz I’ve just started wading my way through this and Michael Forsyth so-called Scot has got RIGHT up my nose already!!!!!!!! My blood is boiling and it’s not even 8am yet.”

Petra, I’m up to my ears in something else ATM but took note of this bit from your post,

” … could my noble friend give an assurance that the same generosity that has been given to Scotland will be applied to England, to the English regions, to Northern Ireland and to Wales? In particular, could he confirm the briefing that was given to the Times by a “Treasury insider” that, had this settlement been in place since 1999, Scotland would have got all the money from Barnett—that is, 20% more per head than in England—plus an additional £6 billion? If so, surely the rest of the United Kingdom is entitled to be treated with similar generosity.”

This exposes the sheer idiocy of the noble lord as it shows he either doesn’t understand how the whole devolution thing is funded or is deliberately attempting to mislead the Lords, commons and the people of the United Kingdoms component parts.

The reason that the per-capita funding in the different countries of the United Kingdom differs is actually very, very simple.

It differs only because the devolved functions from the United Kingdom ministries is by necessity accompanied with the funding from those ministries to fund the devolved functions as the devolved administrations have no tax raising powers.

That is – the tax collected from the devolved countries by Westminster was previously allocated to the United Kingdom ministries who carried out the functions but is devolved to them to fund the devolved functions granted them by Westminster.

Thus the rest of the good Lords contentions are utter pish.

First of all Northern Ireland gets a higher per-capita funding than Scotland as N.I. has the most devolved functions. Wales gets a lesser per-capita funding as Wales has less devolved functions than both N.I. and Scotland.

Why the raving loonie even mentions England or the regions of England in the same context defies any logic whatsoever.

They are non-devolved regions of the non-devolved country of England and are funded directly by the United Kingdom ministries. Yet this loonie is claiming they and England should get funded extra as per N.I. Scotland and Wales.

I’ll be generous and assume the noble Lord is just a congenital idiot and just doesn’t know what he talks about for the alternative assumption is that he is criminally insane.

The HoL have past form in completely reversing the meaning of clauses by simply inserting the word “not”. This usually happens on any discussion of land reform. I don’t have links now but will look. Legislation concerning the Flow Country and the Vestey estates in Sutherland spring to mind.

So it is worth keeping an eye on their noble eminences for sly manipulation of democracy.

The GENUINE circulation figures for the Record and Herald are much less than shown above…….. What about the large racks piled full of Records and Heralds in the departure areas at Glasgow Airport every day, being given away for FREE.
Probably the same thing applies to the Hootsman (& the Record) at Edinburgh airport

@ 1WW. Started by the Royal European cousins. Queen Victoria’s grandchildren. Interdependent treaties. Kaiser, King, Czar. Inbreed. Cousins married cousins and their parents were cousins. Absolute rulers. ‘Divine right of kings’. British Royals survived by being more libal, relinquishing some power. They are still interfering, not impartial, take part in illegal wars, used by politicians, and part of the tax evading, extravagant elite.

Yesterday afternoon after Alex Salmond on the radio show, there was a wee discussion on the ‘Scottish settlement’ and how unhappy the English were, Mr Dale who was very insistent on English subsidising us and one caller who was bleating the usual stuff.

A Scot phoned in and did say Scotland has been subsidising England but of course Dale snorted and poo pooed this.

Worth a listen if it is still available.

@Ghillie Taking me ages to type just a few lines. RA is so debilitating, I get so frustrated with my inability to do simple tasks.

If only some of the more visionary in the SNP would start working towards this.

It doesn’t have to start as a Scotland-wide scheme, although I would prefer that.

The theory has been tested throughout the real world in a variety of countries, and under various political and economic circumstances.

It is not illegal – schemes exist in England.

Its constraints are known, as are its possibilities. The potential it gives for breaking out of the financial and political straightjacket would seem to be worth at least a working party rather than nothing.

Scotland is supposed to run the country with a few crumbs of power extracted from Westminster. The question we should be asking is how can Cameron and Westminster make such a arse of running the UK when it has every single lever of power available to a “normal” democracy.

You have certainly made me feel better by reminding me about Joanna Cherry
So glad we have someone down there who understands the distinction’s between Scottish/English Constutional set up.

I’ve been stunned on many occasions by Westminster MP’s who quite clearly don’t understand how it all is supposed to work,(it’s their actual job FFS)
and make stupid statements,
and other’s who do get it,depending on archaic language to mask what they are really saying.

@ Nana.
Might be a dumb question but have you tried speech recognition instead of using the keyboard? My wife also suffers from RA and has nasty bouts which make the simplest of tasks impossible.
Not sure which platform you use but Windows 10 allows you to activate speech recognition and it will type for you. I’m not sure if you could do it directly into a Wings comment box but you could do it into a document and then cut&paste it over.

If nothing else,then Mr Forsyth has highlighted the current thinking of those who frequent Westminster. The Establishment are looking at all options to surpress the possibility of Scotland attaining independence,probably having been rudely awakened by the result of the referendum.

Should Westminster decide to go down this route,they will open a can of worms far more problematic than the one they have now. Deliberately disabling a Nation’s democracy has been stock in trade for these monsters for centuries.

I await Camerons ideas for a Constitution and discussions on sovereignty with renewed interest..

@Onwards & Cadogan Enright . Re The National very disappointing uptake figures. Definitely preaching to the converted. With the front page declaration of it’s support for Independence it was never going to be read by many folk not already in the YES camp. It’s a serious read, which will really only appeal to a limited audience.
No other paper (or broadcast station) declares it’s political stance. They suck in their readers, with entertainment, their function to have an audience lined up at election time, ready to be told how to vote.

The National is a great read for Anoraks like us. Obviously it doesn’t cater for a larger audience. It had been designed this way from the start……… Would it have been allowed to exist if it was not thus?

Liz G, I saw your comment earlier and remembered Joanna’s comments so had to post it. I know we are all worrying about Westminsters machinations but I thank the snp for Joanna Cherry. She is sharp as a tack.

Les, I will dip in if I see something which must be telt.

Almannysbunnet I will look into that, or should I say I will get ‘him indoors’ to look into that for me. Thank you

Can I just remind everyone the Dame Janet Smith ‘report’ into the BBc is published this morning.

The situation in Scotland and Ireland are different. People in Scotland have the vote and can go through the Ballot Box. People in Ireland at that time did not have the vote. Universal suffrage 1928. Otherwise Ireland would be united. Voters in Ireland could vote to reunite. Ulster became an Apartheid state. The Catholics in Ulster were discriminated against and denied the vote (until the 1960’s in some parts). Masonic rule. Sectarianism. Still divided. The Tories reward the NI Unionists for support in Westminster.

There was a mass movement in Ireland for Home Rule throughout the 19C. led by Protestant (liberal) landowners. Charles Stewart Parnell. Catholics had no rights and were discriminated against. Same in Scotland. People were not allowed to own property, carry a sword or own a horse. Subjugation and brutality. The Clearances, the Irish famine. Migration to US, Australia etc.

In Scotland the Churches have privileges above the Law. i.e The Equal Opportunity Employment Laws. Tolerance. Scotland is a secular country. The majority of people are non religious.

I see there is already a petition ‘ to stop the SNP taking control of the BBC’.

I sometimes wonder, does everything in Scotland have to be so difficult, twisted and manipulated?

For me, before they introduce a Scottish six, first person whose role needs to be looked at is Ken McQuarrie.

He has been responsible for the disconnect between the service BBC Scotland provides and the expectations of the public who pay for it.

Whatever the outcome, K McQ and some well known newsreaders/journalists are too associated with failure.

To ask the same people to invent and present a 60 minute news programme would just be the old Einstein thing, repeat actions, repeat etc and expect a different outcome.

I for one am sick and tired of the Establishment in which I include the BBC of trying to keep Scotland in the dark ages.

If Unionists want to live in a wee insular island , with dreadful air pollution, land and seas infected by the crap they allowed to be dumped on it, while their big all knowing UK Govt pushes people into poverty, eating processed Monsanto guff, fending off people from ‘ no here’ then leave BBC Scotland news alone

But it really doesn’t have to be like this.

There is another Scotland, we just need it to get coverage , what are they so scared of?

I don’t buy any newspapers. I was getting the National for most of the first year of its existence, and I used to get the Sunday Herald every week, but I realised I was buying them for the sake of buying them, and having to specifically make time to read them. I reached the point where I was flicking past most of the paper, because I’d already read the story on the internet the day before. Or in the Sunday Herald’s case, I just kind of lost interest because some of it is just too dry and earnest.

The National and the Sunday Herald are trying to be pro-indy versions of the “broadsheets”, but just look at the papers at the top – tabloids. And what’s the most popular pro-indy website? Wings, which Stu himself says is pitched at being an intelligent tabloid type site.

If we’re serious about breaking the unionist grip on the media, what we need is Record-style paper that is pro-indy. In fact, what we need is for the SUn or Record to convert to independence, because a new title is never going to catch up with them.

I know if the National doesn’t get the sales figures, we’ll lose it. Thing is, I could go back to buying it just for the sake of buying it, or I could donate that money to the SNP for election campaigns. I’ve decided to do the latter.

Yeah, I’m the same when it comes to reading them. Most of the time I’ll just flick through them, and to be fair it has improved a lot recently. But like most of their customers the only reason I’m buying it is the political support.
I figure the £3 a week it costs is effective as a general donation towards independence because it would cost millions to have the equivalent amount of daily front cover advertising in the supermarkets. The tesco near my house always has it in a visible position although I understand thats not the case elsewhere and it often gets a helping hand.

That’s why I get frustrated when there’s not a hard hitting cover.
With the indy support masthead, it’s never going to be a non-partisan paper sucking in a new or non political audience. And it doesn’t have the resources to do so anyway.
So why bother pretending to be balanced. Give the existing audience what they want inside and use the cover like a daily billboard poster, firing into the Tories and the Yoons.

@Petra (Liz G, Macart, galamcennalath)
Yes, thanks for that. Looks like Keen is indeed being straight on this, but then he is maintaining the Government position which is all we can ask for.

I liked the McAvoy, seen that in Germany. You’d have a meeting with a couple of people shouting and the Yank would stand up and say to them “that’s a great idea. What you’re waying is this …”, and then just put forward the better solution. McAvoy just compliments them to the high heavens and then effectively calles them idiots.

I can see the reluctance for further devolution and devo-max, but I disagree, that would get Independence eventually anyway. It also sets up a series of nagging away at Westminster, giving thema chance to say “get lost”, and hopefully upset more devo-maxers who then turn to YES. That’s what Sturgeon has said she’s doing the next parliamentary term, and no sooner was Swinney washed his ears out from being applauded he’s like “Smith was substantively delivered but it’s not the Vow, as near federalism”. In other words, he wants the rest of Smith, then the Vow.

If I fall into this category “However, I reckon some posts are pushing devolution solutions just a little too strongly” which I probably do, it’s because there are many roads, and all lead to Independence. The SNP are quite clearly, to me, sending the troops down all the roads. There will be no escape for the unionists!

OT
A point on the Scottish Fiscal Commission, the SNP refused at a finance committee a couple of weeks back to add running the budget through it or something like that, which was a bit of a surprise at the time. But I think that was yet another fast one, as the UK Government have now made it a condition of the fiscal framework. So as well as allowing the UK Government to “win” that point as part of the compromise, presumably they’re paying for it at least partly instead of the ScotGov …

I’ve been taking methotrexate/sulfalazine and folic acid for almost 7yrs. I will definitely ask about TNF next time I see my consultant.

Had surgery on both hands a few years ago, swelling comes and goes with pins and needles. Sometimes I think it’s best to leave well alone and to be honest the best remedy I have found is Biofreeze gel or spray.

It’s great to hear you have had good results with anti-TNF, that is very encouraging.

At a more local level, I would love to know the figures for the Northern Scot in Moray as I along with many others I know have stopped buying the paper since the referendum!! If any of the readers on here get a chance, it would be interesting to hear your thoughts on comments posted to stories on their website, especially by two disgusting posters known as “trafalgar” and “Eyespy”!!

Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.

Mundell said the withdrawal bill would return powers to Scotland, it didn't, he said he'd amend the bill so it would, he didn't, he said the Lords would amend it so it would, they didn't, he said he would resign if NI got a bespoke deal, they did, he didn't.. #ScotRef /1